Life Cycle Analysis Puns

Science Direct

Conference:30th European Symposium on Computer Aided Process Engineering (ESCAPE 30), 2020

https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823377-1.50102-6

Some very interesting upcoming research suggests that some types of animal agriculture have a lower carbon footprint than plant-based options (including fake meats). Indeed, the research suggests that it's even possible for this approach to act as a carbon sink, effectively removing some carbon from the atmosphere.

Pretty counter-intuitive stuff, but it'll be interesting to see where it goes.

Here are some links to more information:

A good graphical overview: Image

Quantis results presentation: Carbon footprint evaluation of regenerative grazing at White Oak Pastures.

Press Release Article: CSR Wire

Peer-Review submission project: ResearchGate

Hello! I've had my kindle for 2 years now and my GF has had hers for 3 years, I've gotten all my family members hooked on it as well, mom dad aunt and twin.

I recently began thinking about the LCA (title) of a kindle, and if it is environmentally friendly. I know that kindle has other perks such as reducing carry on to 0 for trips etc but how many books would I need to read on my kindle for it to have a lower greenhouse footprint than buying printed books?

I've tried looking around online but nothing has come to me yet. Maybe someone here can help?

Thanks!

EDIT! I managed to find some nice sources. It seems that around 2010 a kindle resulted in some 168kg CO2 (plus server costs for book downloads and charging etc, this is for the manufacturing) and a book produces around 7kg CO2 so with my mind I can estimate it to be around 25 books on a kindle before you're in the green (hehe) regarding emissions. Let's assume that with the kindles added features today that perhaps its gone up to an even 200 kg CO2. Let us also assume that a book perhaps has gone down to 5.7kg due to recycling paper etc etc etc, this means 35 books is the number to beat before replacing your kindle.

Hi everyone, 1st time poster here. I'm halfway through the BCS Business Analysis Foundation course as I'm seeking to move to a BA role, and am wondering if anyone could recommend a read or course that goes through a project life cycle (like a walk-through, kind of). A narrative about how a project was dealt with from start to finish, that would show examples of analysis requirements after requirements elicitation, how process or data models were illustrated, etc. So that I could see in practical terms what the course teaches in theory. Would anyone kindly be able to make a suggestion please? Many thanks.

The Golden Ratio

Some of you may not know about Fibonacci ratios but that's ok. I will not overcomplicate this post and you don't need to be a TA expert to understand it.

Suffice to say, these ratios, particularly what's referred to as the golden ratio (1.618), aren't limited to TA, but ubiquitous in all nature and cosmos.

Fans of The Da Vinci Code will remember Professor Langton explaining how mathematics and art collide via the 'golden ratio.'

The golden ratio is sometimes called the "divine proportion," because of its frequency in the natural world. Space-time itself is defined by this mathematical constant. Naturally, we humans are somehow programmed to act in accordance with this ratio in everything we do.

Golden Ratio in Bitcoin

Bitcoin's price action right now is following the exact same pattern that it did in 2013 and 2017. Let's take a look. These charts are very easy to follow,

First big run, new ATH and correction to 1.618 (2011-2013)

Same pattern (2013-2017)

Unerringly rhythmical (2017-2021)

When Steve Wozniak called Bitcoin a mathematical miracle, he wasn't kidding. Whatever makes the price action so unerringly rhythmical this way between halving cycles can be empirically analyzed by humans similar to the patterns in nature but never fully understood.

It once again begs the question if Mathematics was invented or discovered.

I was already super excited 3 years ago to observe whether the same pattern would play out again. To see it play out exactly the same way (so far) is nothing short of spine-chilling.

You can check out the two pinned posts on my profile.

In February 2018, when everyone was panicking, I pointed out that we would go back to 19k and beyond in the next cycle.

Back then, I hadn't yet analyzed the price action this closely but I knew the quadrennial cycles.

Then in December last year, I called for $100k before the end of 2021 which I still stand by.

Similar to my prediction in 2018, I understand that this may be too optimistic to imagine right at this moment.

In my personal opinion, it's very likely that 29k t

I'm trying a cross-post here, hope I'm doing this right, I made some slight improvements after some review on the DD sub.

So hi everybody, I've been lurking for a while, thought I might have something to contribute to the hive-mind. I'm submitting this late at night California time cause it took me a while, it turned out to be very long. Anyway, good morning Euro friends! Can't wait to visit you all again someday!

So I've seen a lot of speculation on FTD cycles of 20-something days, 30-something days, etc, plenty of people wonder if there's really something wonky with GME's price, it sure looks like there are some cycles there, but is there anyway to measure that in a quantitative way? Yes, it's called Fourier Analysis, also known as looking at a plot of power spectral density.

I've heard some people use this phrase "technical analysis" of price movements, which I believe is called that because it is only just technically a form of analysis? Haha, ok but I seriously don't know why they call it that. I know I'm not the only science-type here, I have a background that does not involve finance but does involve using statistics and I will attempt to perform a statistical analysis. There will be some hand-waving by the end, and in that sense, this may remind you of a so-called technical analysis.

Here's a meme to explain some of the deep secrets of statistical analysis:

https://preview.redd.it/kj5wzkrzo1171.jpg?width=590&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5b2b5645ca18bc1fef5d388dea366203e9f7b6e7

Ok so the first question here is how to slice and dice our data. A Fourier analysis requires an unbroken series of consecutive samples of the signal for which you wish to know the power associated with any variable cycles in that signal. That is, if you want to know how much amplitude power is associated with price movements on a 30-day time-scale, you would need an unbroken series of prices many times longer than 30 days. This is because if you only had a random stretch of 60 days, for example, you would only be likely to catch one 30 day-cycle in the middle. If you had data for a consecutive stretch of 120 trading days, you could see 3, maybe 4 cycles with 30-day periods depending on when the cycle starts.

So one thing to watch out for is the maximum length of a period under consideration in a Fourier analysis, and only trust power reported for cycles 2 to 4

1. The mode is populated entirely of the top 1% of players, people getting carried by those players, and cheaters.
2. That small demographic cries out for Bungie to make the PvP mode more accessible so that the population will grow.
3. Bungie listens, and makes some decent, meaningful changes to PvP.
4. Players who wouldn't normally play PvP start to dip their toes into the playlist after the changes.
5. Player count in PvP skyrockets for a few weeks.
6. Without any form of overall skill rating to base the matchmaking on, the new players become cannon fodder for the top 1% of players and the players they carried. The top 1% claims it to be "the best weekend of crucible in years."
7. Those new players provide Bungie with meaningful feedback. That they like the new changes to the mode, but they're not going to play weekly if it just means being farmed by players on their 10th or 20th flawless card of the weekend.
8. Bungie tests multiple different ways to try and balance matchmaking in order to keep games fair to try to keep the weekly population up.
9. The 1% of players becomes outraged, because with the new system they can no longer go flawless with no effort multiple times a weekend, and now have to play against players on their own level.
10. That top 1% (usually with large platforms to speak about the game) starts to campaign that the new changes are actually bad for the game, even though realistically the only people who don't benefit from these changes are the 1%.
11. Bungie eventually caves after weeks of trying to find a happy medium, and reverts PvP back to what it was in order to keep the 1% interested.
12. The new and casual players start to leave the PvP playlist altogether, and the population in PvP drops significantly until...
13. Go back to step 1.

I don't think that the Flawless pool or the new system based on overall wins are good solutions, but I think Bungie shifting the view from only card-based to a more overall metric is a step in the right direction. I think the key here is that they need to based the matchmaking "rating" off of multiple sources, not just wins or whether or not a player has been flawless this weekend.

There needs to be some way to keep matches fair. Trials is essentially Destiny's ranked mode. The idea that the top players are constantly whining about having to play against players of equal skill in what is supposed to be the most competitive playlist in the game is embarrassing for these "top level" players a

[EDIT: Part One]  

tl;dr In Rainbows is about a human life and about life itself. The album itself completes a circle of life, one complete human life cycle. It begins with a human's birth and progresses chronologically through that human's life. (There is a separate, side storyline within, involving animals.) The human conceives and gives birth to a second human and dies.  

I have tons of actual lyrical corroboration for this nutty theory. Here are the nuts and bolts first...  

Birth is quite literal, simply the physical embodiment of a soul. Life involves aging, procreation, and most of all, a passionate spiritual struggle between a dark side of confusion and emptiness, and a light side of spirituality and aligning with the Universal Deity.  

Here's where it gets a bit tricky: a secondary, parallel narrative emerges at the end of song 4 and lasts for two songs. To distinguish, I label the original first one "Allegory" and the second, new one "Literal". The aforementioned dark/light duality in life is echoed in the middle two songs by these dual narratives of human life (allegory) and animal life (literal). The secondary storyline resolves to completion at the end of song 6.  

We return to the human who then faces mortality, procreates via the act of sex, and gives birth to a child. Finally, after giving birth, the protagonist's Death is also quite literally represented as the end, the completion of this cycle. ...That's the gist. Here we go!

 

So 15 Step and Bodysnatchers depict the beginning: birth and early life.  

"how come I end up where I started?" = when I die I return to the void of wherever it is I was before I was born  

"reel me out" and "cut the string" = the birth event and the severing of the umbilical cord, but also eventually the cutting of the string of life (death).  

"did your string come undone?" = your string is your umbilical cord attachment to your mother. The question here is "were you born?" and the answer to "what happened?" in the previous line is, yes, you were born. Thom is breaking the fourth wall here so to speak and engaging his listeners directly on the matter of our own individual births. This is supported by the following "us" as he is talking about himself and all of us listeners.  

"sheer drop" = emerging from or dropping out of the womb to be born, but also the drop of death (see the later d

When I encourage my family and friends to stop buying single-use products like paper plates, napkins and plastic cutlery, they justify their purchases by noting that I "waste" water and energy by washing my reusable materials. Their perception of the total resources used in production and transportation of disposable goods differs drastically from mine, but I have no specific data to justify my beliefs. Has anyone here performed a life cycle analysis of some common single-use throw away items?

Abstract

Everyone, from the savvy investor looking to make a quick funny post for friends to the hardened tycoon owning multiple monetised meme pages, needs to fully understand the meme life cycle in order to properly capitalise on their hard work. This post will go through the aims of a meme, the life cycle of memes in general and will conclude with recommended stratagems moving forward.

Currency

What is currency? It's what we earn from peddling our wares. You ultimately post something to Facebook, twitter, instagram or Reddit for the momentary sense of importance you gain from large amounts of worthless internet points. You earn this brief sense of importance from the tens/hundreds/thousands of people who independently indicate in some way or the other that your post has amused them.

In a very real sense "1 like = 1 importance" (there was some truth to those tired Facebook images after all).

Depending on the market this "like" will take many forms. Reddit has the simple karma system that we're all familiar with, Twitter has the like and the retweet (exchange rate seems to settle around 10:1 for like to retweet), and Facebook has recently convoluted their system with the introduction of reacts, but they're similar enough as to be identical. Shares and retweets are always* more beneficial than likes as they expand the reach of your post thereby increasing the potential for further likes and shares.

Our aim as memers is obviously to maximise this currency for ourselves. So, to talk in the language of this sub, a promising investment is a meme that is likely to soon generate large amounts of currency. Similarly SELL SELL SELLs should only be issued when the joke is so dead that any further rendition of it is likely to be completely rejected by the wider market and generate next to no currency for yourself regardless of effort.

*Assuming the post remains attributable to you. Quoted tweets are therefore less useful as you often become the but of the joke, negative currency, if you will.

Meme life cycle

In order to know when to invest (to spend time making memes using the format in discussion), it is important to understand what stage the meme is at and where it is likely to go from there. I give the following advice with caution, I am not a professional banker and none of the following should be taken as genuine financial advice, experts advice should always be sought if large investments are about to be made.

The typical meme life cy

This game was ruined by SBMM but playing Domination/Hardpoint on maps like Moscow, Satellite and even Crossroads was a lot of fun when the lobbies were balanced. Even Miami Strike was one of my favourite maps but it came out way too late. This game had the first Nuketown in years that I could actually play almost constantly (sweaty lobbies aside). It's just pathetic that each title pretty much expires after 1 year and I feel like CW got better later on.

I'm currently writing an in-depth and lengthy report on what makes the Diablo franchise tick and why it is arguably the best in its genre (ARPG). Among other things I am trying to determine what the common player does and feels throughout his life-cycle playing through the game.

I have determined this through my own experience and the experience of my friends, who range from casual to hardcore players.

I would love to get feedback from you on where you think areas of gameplay are missing, a drag on player experience, or a core part of what makes the game enjoyable for you.

Note that this is taken primarily from the perspective of Diablo 2, as Diablo 3 appears to take a number of steps backward in terms of deep gameplay systems and enrichment (However that appears to be changing).

Early on & first play through:

1. Building a unique character.

• The loot reward loop.
• Experiencing and learning gameplay systems.
• Playing with item crafting, differing skills and items builds, etc.

Mid:

1. Increased difficulties making the game more of a challenge.

• Requires the understanding of gameplay systems.
• Uses basic understanding of current gameplay systems to learn new ones or more in-depth.
• Runes or runewords are more complex gems.
• The unique and set piece items drop more.
• Monsters have more advanced combos of resistances, conditions.

Late:

1. Challenge ramped up further.

• Full depth of item, skill and character building is explored.
• Best items in the game are dropped here.
• Items that can only be acquired by crafting or trading are sought after (runes).
• Specific specialized builds are worked towards.
• Players try to ‘collect’ item sets (Pokemon fever).
• Players may begin to re-roll new characters at this point to try different or more efficient builds.

End:

1. Players continue late-game processes.

• Meta-game is introduced.
• Global player scoring/ladder system.
• Players goal tends to end up being about finding the most efficient (fun) grind.
• Gear to get through to x boss and kill for maximum loot.
• (D2) Players may hunt/grind specific mobs or areas for specific items that drop most often there (Baal runs).
• Players will roll new characters.
• (D3) Endless ‘greater rift’ system that increases in level and difficulty until you die. Ladder system built around it to cause a meta-game of who can get the furthest.
• Sub-ladders for classes, coop 2-3-4 players, hardcore, etc.

Introduced: Sponsor: Rep. Pete Stauber [R-MN8]

This bill was referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure which will consider it before sending it to the House floor for consideration.

Rep. Pete Stauber [R-MN8] is a member of the committee.

Govtrack.us Summary

Dear critical theorists, I am trying to formulate my discontent with the 'life-cycle analysis' approach which I heard a panel speak about at the annual meetings in October (link: http://live.worldbank.org/resilient-infrastructure?utm_source=&utm_medium=&utm_campaign=).

Life-cycle analysis seems to start from the assumption that commodities are currently too cheap. Through a quantification (commodification) of the possible environmental and social costs that result from the production, usage and degradation of the commodities we can create a market that is build on 'real costs'.

One the one hand I understand that simply making stuff more expensive does not solve any distributional issues (both distribution of surplus or distribution of current inequalities in private property), nor does it problematize the means of production as private property.

On the other hand I wonder whether or not life-cycle costs could be part of a marxist understanding of what needs to change, albeit on the condition that it is combined with lots of other stuff.

Would you have any thoughts with regards to this? Do you think life-cycle analysis is partly anticapitalist? Or do you have any literature references for me that hold valuable insights with regards to this?

Thanks so much!

Hey everybody, I've been lurking for a while, thought I might have something to contribute to the hivemind. I'm submitting this late at night California time cause it took me a while, it turned out to be very long. Anyway, good morning Euro friends! Can't wait to visit you all again someday!

So I've seen a lot of speculation on FTD cycles of 20-something days, 30-something days, etc, plenty of people wonder if there's really something wonky with GME's price, it sure looks like there are some cycles there, but is there anyway to measure that in a quantitative way? Yes, it's called Fourier Analysis, also known as looking at a plot of power spectral density.

I've heard some people use this phrase "technical analysis" of price movements, which I believe is called that because it is only just technically a form of analysis? Haha, ok but I seriously don't know why they call it that. I know I'm not the only science-type here, I have a background that does not involve finance but does involve using statistics and I will attempt to perform a statistical analysis. There will be some hand-waving by the end, and in that sense, this may remind you of a so-called technical analysis.

Here's a meme to explain some of the deep secrets of statistical analysis:

Stats

Ok so the first question here is how to slice and dice our data. A Fourier analysis requires an unbroken series of consecutive samples of the signal for which you wish to know the power associated with any variable cycles in that signal. That is, if you want to know how much amplitude power is associated with price movements on a 30-day time-scale, you would need an unbroken series of prices many times longer than 30 days. This is because if you only had a random stretch of 60 days, for example, you would only be likely to catch one 30 day-cycle in the middle. If you had data for a consecutive stretch of 120 trading days, you could see 3, maybe 4 cycles with 30-day periods depending on when the cycle starts.

So one thing to watch out for is the maximum length of a period under consideration in a Fourier analysis, and only trust power reported for cycles 2 to 4 times shorter than that stretch. So that said, we've got several long time periods of interest to choose from. For this analysis, I choose 3 main periods: The before times of 2016-2019, The Short Period when prices w